l Will this bill give the state new powers to spy on people's phone calls and emails?
No. The bill creates a legal basis for the continuation of existing police and security agency capabilities to access communications data and to intercept suspects' calls and emails. It will allow telecoms companies to retain data for 12 months, so that law enforcement agencies can use it while investigating serious crimes.
l What is the difference between communications data and intercepts?
Communications data includes details of when, where and how individuals contacted one another electronically, but not the content of any calls or emails.
It has been used in 95 per cent of all serious organised crime cases handled by the Crown Prosecution Service and every major Security Service counter-terrorism investigation over the last decade.
Legal intercepts involve police or security agencies listening in to a specific suspect's calls or viewing the content of emails. Intercepts require a warrant signed by the Home Secretary in every case, and are subject to oversight by the Interception of Communications Commissioner.
l If there are no new powers, why do we need a bill at all?
A European Court of Justice ruling in April struck down an EU directive permitting the retention of data by telecomms companies, on privacy grounds.
Unlike other EU countries - such as Ireland and Denmark - Britain had implemented the directive through secondary legislation, rather than writing it into UK law with an Act of Parliament.
Without the directive, companies could start deleting data within weeks.
l Why is the bill being rushed through Parliament in three days?
The ECJ ruling comes into effect in the autumn, and the Prime Minister believes that the UK could face a "cliff edge" within weeks when data would start being deleted.
If the bill is not passed by the time Parliament goes into recess on July 22, it will be too late to act when MPs return from their long summer break in September.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article